I published Classic Backgammon Revisited in 2001, and it is with
decidedly mixed emotion that I report it is now out of print. Carol has
about fifteen copies left.
Im thinking of doing another print run. If I do, Id like to correct
the glaring errors of the first edition. I know many have been discussed
previously on these boards, but I havent always been diligent in taking
notes. Heres what I have so far:
#32. Advanced BG #80. 9 point is best of all. (The only position I know
of where I missed the best play.)
#34/35. Pages 58 and 59 are missing ultimate periods. (How did that
happen?)
#52. Some, including Senk and Marty Storer, have criticized the gist of
the analysis.
#111. Numerical analysis doesnt add up. Doubling gains .5? I got some
new rollout data at the last minute, and didnt modify enough of the
text.
#112. Blacks pip count is 114, not 120.
Any other thoughts?
BTW, Im not planning on marketing a second printing as a new edition. I
dont intend to do enough work on it to justify trying to resell to
current owners. I just want to correct some errors, and post the
corrections to the website as well.
Thanks for your help,
Jeremy

I recall a conversation here a while ago about problem 18 (Paradoxes and
Probabilities #53). In discussing why 13/7 13/10 is no better than 13/7
11/8, you wrote that the extra outfield blots "seem to create more
covers for the bar, but actually pick up only the roll of 44." Since
there are nine more covering numbers (33 vs. 24), several of your
readers were confused.
I understood you to mean that the other eight rolls (32, 43, 53, 54)
were duplicated, since they could be used to make the 4 or 3 point
instead. This argument could be made more explicit, although it looks
like you have only half a line of blank space to play with.